I'm not a huge fan of medieval lit; however, out of all of the books I read in this class, Tristan was my favorite. The movie came out a few months after I read the book, which was great entertainment. The movie was so bad, all I did was laugh through it. ( )

I really liked this. I thought the translation was very good: it's engaging and interesting and doesn't get too dry, as some translations are prone to doing. Of course, it seems like a lot of that is down to the original text, which I do wish I could experience. But the translation is well done, I think. The descriptions are gorgeous, in places, and the imagery is lovely.

I really enjoyed learning about Tristan's history, too, with his foster father and how he grows up. He's a bit of a "Gary Stu", as fandom would put it: he's a bit too perfect. A bit of a Lancelot all round, really (I don't really like most portrayals of Lancelot).

The problem with enjoying this is how shameless Tristan and Isolde are. They trick Mark and make him feel guilty for ever suspecting them, and then respond to his love for them by cuckolding him again. They don't seem to make any real effort to hold back. And Tristan mistreats the other Isolde (of the White Hands), and Isolde the Fair's treatment of Brangane is ridiculous. Of course, these problems that are there for a modern reader might not be, for the original audience -- I'm aware of that, and it doesn't actually affect my rating of it because I enjoyed reading it so much. Still, it's hard to sympathise with the characters when they do things like that.

There are some great passages, though -- really affecting, and you can really feel for the characters. I had more sympathies for Mark than I'd expected.

It really isn't Arthurian at all, incidentally. There are a couple of references to King Arthur, but Tristan isn't a knight of the Round Table here. I'm still 'shelving' it as Arthurian, though, because of how strongly linked the Tristan and Iseult story has become with the Arthurian stories. ( )

Forget Lancelot and Guenivere, Tristan and Isolde are the original Romeo and Juliet!

Gottfried caries on the romatic tradition and creates a love tringle between Isolde, Tristan, and King Marke. The legend of the doomed lovers unfolds in the classic tradition that ends (albeit abruptly) in tragedy. Gottfried's poem is unfinished but the book also contains the translation of Thomas' "Tristan" as well. The book omits the connection to the Court of King Arthur but it does not detract from the legend. This book is closer to Beroul's Tristan and the 2006 movie staring Franco, Myles, and Sewell rather than the 15th century "Le Morte D'Arthur" by Malory. I recommend this version of the tale over all the others I've read! ( )

FF: One of the great romances of the Middle Ages, Tristan, written in the early thirteenth century, is based on a medieval love story of grand passion and deceit. By slaying a dragon, the young prince Tristan wins the beautiful Isolde’s hand in marriage for his uncle, King Mark. On their journey back to Mark’s court, however, the pair mistakenly drink a love-potion intended for the king and his young bride, and are instantly possessed with an all-consuming love for each another - a love they are compelled to conceal by a series of subterfuges that culminates in tragedy. Von Strassburg’s work is acknowledged as the greatest rendering of this legend of medieval lovers, and went on to influence generations of writers and artists and inspire Richard Wagner’s Tristan and Isolde.